Q Do you want to address the remarks by President Putin, who said the
United States setting up a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe was
like the Soviet Union putting missiles in Cuba, setting up a Cuban
Missile Crisis?

MS. PERINO: Well, I think that the historical comparison is not -- does
not exactly work. What I can say is what President Putin went on to
say, which is that the President and President Putin have said that we
can work together on this. President Putin said that today, that he
believes that there's a path where the United States and Russia can work
to figure out a way to get the system to work in a way that works for
both people -- for both countries.

The purpose of the missile defense system in Europe is to defend against
a missile that would attack one of our European allies and Russia; and
that's the purpose of it. And as President Putin identified two people
to work with, two people the President designated -- Secretaries Rice
and Gates -- who were just there last week. And our military leaders
are in communication to try to figure out if we can use some of their
technology in order to make this system work.

Q So you don't think this is a heightening of tensions over the
missile shield?

MS. PERINO: I think if anyone takes a look at his entire comments and
looks at them objectively, there's no way you could walk away without
thinking that he thinks that we can work together.

Q As a follow-up, Dana, have you gotten any readout -- I asked Tony
about this earlier -- on the President's conversation with Putin since
the visit to Iran and what his sense was of the gap between the U.S. on
this and on Iran policy?

MS. PERINO: Well, we -- yes, and I think we have provided a readout on
that. That call happened I think -- maybe Monday, or earlier in the
week; it was definitely earlier in the week, I think it was Monday --
might have been Tuesday. But President Putin had a conversation where
they talked about a variety of issues, including the issue of Iran. And
the President does believe that Iran -- that Russia agrees that Iran
should not be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. And he came away
feeling that that was a solid answer from President Putin.

Q Staying with Iran for a second. On the unintended side events,
perhaps, you know oil closed at the record-high yesterday. What's the
concern that as the rhetoric with Iran gets ratcheted up, that what the
main way Americans will feel the impact is higher oil prices?

MS. PERINO: Well, higher oil prices are something that has been
building up for over a decade and it's something that the President has
been talking since 2001 -- which is a way to try to get our country to
move away from traditional fossil fuel oil use and to look at
alternatives and also conservation. There's several initiatives the
President has put forward; one right now is pending in front of
Congress. It's 20 percent reduction in gasoline use in 10 years, by
2017. So there's a lot of different ways that we can do that. The
problem here --

Q The way the markets seem to digest what was happening yesterday was
that as tensions escalate, it may cut off the flow of oil.

MS. PERINO: Well, I'm not going to comment on market conditions or
market movements; there's a lot of different factors that go into that.
Part of what we have in our -- in the world is very high demand and not
enough supply, and so providing alternatives to traditional oil use is
what the President is focused on.

Look, the problem here isn't the United States, it's not the
international community. The problem is Iran, and Iran has not stepped
back from trying to pursue a nuclear weapon, and -- or reprocessing and
enriching uranium, which would lead to a nuclear weapon. We have
provided Iran with a path in order to have a civilian nuclear program.
They have not taken that path. And so yesterday what we did is identify
additional sanctions that we could put -- that we could use, in addition
to the diplomacy, so that we can put pressure on the Iranians so that
they will change their behavior.

Q And one follow. Is the White House concerned that as a result of
those sanctions, oil prices may go up?

MS. PERINO: Look, oil prices are a concern across the board. We have
very tight supply, and we have growing demand, and not just from our
country. When you have growing countries like China, with an economic
growth rate of 11 percent last quarter -- and they need a lot of
resources in order to make their economy grow.

So what we have to do in the United States is look to alternatives, not
just because of oil prices, but because of the environmental benefits,
as well.

Kelly.

Q Dana, on Tuesday, FEMA's deputy administrator held what was called
a news briefing to talk about the California wildfires. And from what
we understand, the questions were posed not by reporters, but by
staffers, and that distinction was not made known. Is that appropriate?

MS. PERINO: It is not. It is not a practice that we would employ here
at the White House or that we -- we certainly don't condone it. We
didn't know about it beforehand. FEMA has issued an apology, saying
that they had an error in judgment when they were attempting to try to
get out a lot of information to reporters, who were asking for answers
to a variety of questions in regards to the wildfires in California.
It's not something I would have condoned, and they, I'm sure, will not
do it again.

Q Who is responsible?

MS. PERINO: FEMA is responsible, and they have taken that -- they have
accepted that responsibility, and they issued an apology today.

Q But isn't -- a follow-up on that. Isn't there a normal morning
call with all the press secretaries of all the agencies here, and
whether somebody is having a press briefing or not is discussed?

MS. PERINIO: We have a variety of ways that we talk to the --
communicate to the communicators in the agency. FEMA is not on that
daily call, no, and I don't know if the DHS -- the head of DHS
communications knew about it either. But FEMA has apologized for the
error in judgment.

MS. PERINO: You'll have to ask them. They have admitted that they had
an error in judgment. I would agree with that. They've issued an
apology. You'll have to ask them about why they decided to do that.

Q But isn't the President concerned, at a time when he is traveling
to the area to talk about a very significant natural disaster -- there
have been issues about FEMA in the past, trying to make a distinction
about progress made, and for them to effectively pretend to hold a news
conference, doesn't the President have concerns about that?

MS. PERINO: I just said that the White House did not know about it
before hand, and the White House condones* [sic] it. And they have
apologized for it. They had an error in judgment, they've admitted
that. And I think that what they were -- I don't think that there was
any mal-intent. I think that they were trying to provide information to
the public through the press, because there were so many questions
pouring in. It was just a bad way to handle it, and they know that.

Q Will anybody be reprimanded?

MS. PERINO: You'll have to ask FEMA.

Q Dana, back on Iraq for a moment. There was another Putin analogy.
Yesterday he compared the U.S. imposing of new sanctions on Iran to --
we're running around like a madman with a blade in his hands. And can
you comment on that and the critics' view that these sanctions are
counterproductive to the U.S. objective of getting Iran to give up its
nuclear programs.

MS. PERINO: The sanctions are part of the diplomatic process, and that
has been laid out for several years. We are being very patient with
Iran. We have laid out a schedule for them to be able to comply with
the unanimous consent of the U.N. Security Council, that they need to
stop the enrichment and reprocessing activities that they have going on
in their country.

Again, this is not -- the United States is not at fault. The
international community is not at fault. Iran is at fault for not
stopping its activities. And sanctions are part of the diplomatic
process, they buttress the diplomatic process. They make it clear that
we are very serious about making sure that they do not have a path to
get a nuclear weapon. So I reject the notion that it is irresponsible,
because I think it is quite responsible and shows that we are, one,
serious, but that we also are committed to the diplomatic path, and that
we are going to buttress that with sanctions.

Q And as to whether these kinds of comments by President Putin show
that he's not anywhere near on the same page as the Bush administration?

MS. PERINO: I'm not going to comment on them.

Q Can I ask you about President Putin? I mean, how would you
characterize the relationship with President Putin? I mean, is he a
strong U.S. ally with rhetoric like this? And also the Cuban missile
comparison, is that helpful?

MS. PERINO: I think that -- look, the President has said that we have a
good but complicated and complex relationship with Russia. And the
President has a relationship with President Putin, one, that he treats
him with a lot of respect, and because of that, he's able to have very
frank and honest discussions with him. And I think the relationship --
in a variety of ways, we work well together on many different issues.

In any -- when you're dealing with a world leader that has a different
point of view, you don't come out and slam them for that, just because
they have a different point of view on a particular thing. But the
bottom line is Iran does agree that -- I'm sorry, Russia agrees that
Iran should not be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. That hasn't
changed.

We want to see China and Russia do more in regards to the sanctions that
we have followed through on, that are part of the U.N. Security Council
resolutions. But just because you have a complicated or complex
relationship doesn't mean it can't also be a good one.

Q But it doesn't (inaudible) where this relationship is headed in the
future? It doesn't seem to bode well for where the U.S. --

MS. PERINO: Well, I think the President has done a very good job of
making sure that this country has good relationships with Russia, and
that's across the board. And I think one of the things you can look at
is just last week he sent his Secretaries of State and Defense to Russia
to have conversations with the leaders of Russia for the -- with their
foreign minister and defense minister. But they also met with President
Putin, as well. And President Bush meets with President Putin quite
often; he just saw him at the beginning of September in Sydney, and I'm
sure they'll see each other again at the next international meeting.

So we have a good relationship, but it's complex. None of these things
are easy. It's just something that takes time, and we are patient and
we work through them all.

Anybody else on Iran or Putin?

Q Yes. The Russians seem to be concerned that -- especially in light
of the latest sanctions the U.S. has proposed -- Iran is being pushed
toward a corner for which there is no diplomatic solution; that it's
only war. So what are your expectations of the President's -- the White
House declaration yesterday, basically that if you do business with Iran
you cannot do business with the United States?

MS. PERINO: Well, not only are they trying to pursue -- they are not
halting their enrichment and reprocessing activities in Iran, but they
are also state sponsors of terror and sponsoring terrorist organizations
like Hezbollah. It is the height of responsibility to put sanctions on
Iran that buttress our diplomatic efforts.

We provided a path. We, along with our -- the P5-plus-1, together,
provided a path for Iran to have a civil nuclear program. They have
decided to reject that path, and so we continue to push, very patiently,
the diplomacy that the President has laid out, along with his allies,
and we are going to continue to do so. Iran has a choice to make. The
problem is not with us, it is with Iran.

Q But my question actually went to Russia and China.

MS. PERINO: Okay.

Q The declaration seems to be, if you can do business with Iran, you
can't do business with the U.S. Are you telling Russia and China and
their banks, you must divest yourself of investments in Iran, or you
can't do business with the U.S.?

MS. PERINO: Well, I think it's a little bit more complicated than that
-- how sanctions work, and I'll have to refer you over to Stuart Levey
at the Treasury Department for how all that works. In fact, he and
Secretary -- Under Secretary of State Nick Burns did a full briefing
yesterday where they lay out a lot of these details, because sanctions
work in different ways.

Q All right, let me ask another general question then. It was May
that we had talked with Iran about providing weapons to insurgents in
Iraq. Have you basically concluded that trying to talk to Iran about
that is also a waste of time?

MS. PERINO: Well, look, we continue to try to talk with them. And in
fact, what Secretary Rice said yesterday, she reiterated something she
said for months, which is, she would meet with Iran's Foreign Minister
anytime, anywhere, if they would want to meet and have these
discussions. We are very concerned that Iran is targeting our soldiers
in Iraq. The Iraqis are concerned that Iran is meddling in its
business. And these sanctions push Iran to understand that we are very
serious about making sure that our soldiers are kept safe and that they
are not allowed -- to the greatest extent possible that we can -- not
allowed to fund state sponsors of terror, like Hezbollah. And that's
what the sanctions are meant to do.

Anyone else on this? Okay, we'll move on. Roger.

Q It's oil-related.

MS. PERINO: Okay.

Q Oil was trading at $92 a barrel today. That's 51 percent higher
than a year ago. Is there any concern that it's going to start damaging
the economy?

MS. PERINO: Well, I'm not an economist -- and we could try to get you
together with Eddie Lazear -- but we do believe that oil prices are way
too high, especially for families who deal -- if you have a family
budget, the one item that you don't have flexibility on is on your
energy cost: You have to pay to heat your home and pay for gas in your
car so that you can get to work and back. We have to look for
alternatives. That's what we are trying to do. We are asking the
Congress to move forward as well.

What is amazing is that our economy has been so resilient over the past
several years, despite high energy prices. We have good job growth, we
have good exports. Of course the housing market has taken a beating and
we're trying to work through that and see if we can make sure that there
are measures in place to allow people to keep their homes, but certainly
energy prices are a concern. One of the best ways to help bring them
down is to broaden out supply. And I would submit to you that the
energy bills that the Congress is now putting -- pushing forward by the
Democrats do not include a lot of energy production. There's not in
that -- there's not a lot of energy in the energy bill, and we would
like them to take a second look at that and get something to the
President before Christmas.

Q But the main two reasons are the Iran sanctions thing and the
tension between Turks and Iraqis.

MS. PERINO: Look, I think there could be a lot of reasons that oil
prices go high. I'm not going to comment on the market movements;
there's plenty of people around this country who would. But I think
that the problem comes down -- the basic problem comes down to supply
and demand, and that's something that we are trying to address.

Q Same question.

MS. PERINO: Okay.

Q You know, back when the President Bush was running for office and
he was weighing out an energy --

MS. PERINO: In 2000?

Q No, the last election.

MS. PERINO: Okay.

Q When he was weighing out his energy policy, he talked about the
need for expanding refineries in this country, but that's gone from your
vocabulary. All you talk about is renewables. Does that mean that the
President is no longer in --

MS. PERINO: Well, maybe that's my fault. I mean, I can talk about --
we have an entire comprehensive package in our energy proposal, and in
fact Al Hubbard, the President's Economic Advisor, sent to Congress just
last week a letter outlining what we could and couldn't accept in an
energy bill.

Now, of course expanding refining capacity in our country is critically
important. It's really tight right now. And as you have -- when you
have maintenance that has to happen every year, you have -- that
refinery pressure is even more constricted. And so we do want
additional refineries. You do run into some problems of citing these
permits at different places around the country, because people don't
like to have them in their backyards. But it's something we have to
deal with.

Q Republicans and Democrats are trying to kill a refinery expansion
in northern Indiana that was approved by the EPA -- part of it was
approved by the EPA. And the White House and the Energy Department have
pretty much been silent. They've left Governor Mitch Daniels out there
to hang. I'm wondering why the administration --

MS. PERINO: Can I look into it? I don't know about that specific
refinery. I do know that the President supports expanding refinery
capacity in the country. We'll get back to you on it.

Olivier.

Q Dana, in your answer I think to Elaine about the Putin-Bush
relationship, you said that "when you disagree with a world leader you
don't go out there and slam them." Was that aimed at President Putin?

MS. PERINO: No, it was more aimed at you all. (Laughter.) Every time
I come in here, and you ask me about President Putin's comments, it's
like you want me to say something derogatory or negative about another
world leader on behalf of the President. And I'm not going to do it.

Q So you weren't saying that President Putin acted inappropriately by
coming out and --

MS. PERINO: No, no, I am not saying that.

Ken.

Q Dana, the Committee to Protect Journalists, citing recent physical
attacks on reporters in the Democratic Republic of Congo, today urged
President Bush to raise that topic with President Kabila. Do you know
if that topic came up?

MS. PERINO: I didn't. I didn't get a chance to sit in on that, but
I'll check.

John.

Q Thank you, Dana. Two questions. Senate bill 505, the so-called
Hawaii apartheid bill, has resurfaced recently. And this is the one
that would permit native Hawaiians to declare themselves a sovereign
nation. Does the administration have a position on that?

MS. PERINO: John, I know that we have expressed one in the past; I
can't remember exactly what our position is. But if there's not a
statement of administration policy out there -- there's a SAP out, so
we'll get a copy of that for you right after the briefing.

Q The other thing, Dana, is, in California recently, campaign has
started to place a measure on the ballot that would change the electoral
college distribution or electoral vote distribution from statewide to
winner-take-all by congressional district, the way they do it in Maine
and Nebraska. And a lot of the President's friends are behind it, I
noticed. Is the administration in favor of it?

MS. PERINO: Well, it's the first I've heard of it, and I don't know
what the President's position is on it.

Q Read my column; it's all about it. (Laughter.)

MS. PERINO: Great advertisement.

Paula.

Q It's estimated that up to 2 million housing foreclosures could
happen if restrictions aren't lifted, in terms of sub-prime mortgages.
And I just wondered, does the White House have any second thoughts about
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, in terms of any kind of relaxation?

MS. PERINO: I'm not well-versed in all of the details. I do know that
we have FHA modernization bill that we would like the Congress to pass.

One thing I should point out, last night -- well, within the last 24
hours, since the President has been in California, there have been two
additions to the help that we can provide to people in California. One
is the Department of Labor issued $50 million worth of grants for people
looking for work. And this allows California to hire people who have
lost their jobs to help with the recovery and the cleanup. And in
addition to that, HUD has put a 90-day moratorium on some types of
foreclosures, so that people can get their feet on the ground and make
sure that they are taken care of down there in Southern California.

But I'll ask Tony Fratto to get back to you on that.

Q In the statement this morning, the President talked about SCHIP.
One of his concerns was that there were not any negotiations with those
that he chose. But I wondered, has the White House invited Congress --
congressional leaders to come here, or does it intend to invite them to
come --

MS. PERINO: You'll recall, Paula, that it was I think maybe a week or
maybe two weeks ago that the President designated three people to
represent him in negotiations on the State Children's Health Insurance
Program, so that we could find common ground with the Democrats. He
sent Secretary Leavitt of Health and Human Services, OMB Director
Nussle, and Al Hubbard, the National Economic Advisor, to Capitol Hill
in order to have discussions. The Democrats wouldn't meet with us, and
I think that does not bode well when you're trying to find a -- when
you're to negotiate.

Q Why didn't you invite them here?

MS. PERINO: The President directed those three individuals to meet with
Congress. The Congress -- if Congress wanted to actually meet with us
and they wanted to find a different -- a new venue, if that would help
them, if they wanted to leave Capitol Hill in order to come together,
then we could consider that. But I think the fact of the matter is they
didn't want to meet. They want the issue; they don't want a solution.
Yesterday they passed a bill that will -- that is not substantially
different from what the President vetoed originally. It appears that in
the House, they yet again don't have enough votes to override the
President's veto.

And incredibly enough, Senator Reid is planning to use -- eat up more
precious time debating this issue in the Senate, where they're not
willing to have the Republicans have a say in any of the matter. So
they're going to waste more time and send another bill to the President
that they know he will veto. And they will not be able to override it
at this time. So we think that this is a big waste of time. We think
that it would be better to sit down with us. We offered some ways that
we could find common ground; we offered additional money. But we're not
going to compromise on the one principle that we think is key to this
debate: Poor children should be taken care of first.

Q The additional funding would be required, to be paid for, and if
the White House is opposed to any sort of increase on the tobacco tax,
how do you expect to --

MS. PERINO: The President believes that there is plenty of money in the
federal coffers and that we do not need to raise taxes.

Les.

Q Thank you, Dana. Two questions. The AP reports that there is
considerable opposition from landowners in Texas to federal plans to
build a border fence. And my question: What is the President's
position on resistance to this fence that he and Congress agreed is
needed?

MS. PERINO: Well, the President, as former governor of Texas, knows
that there are many people on the border who disagree with having a
fence on their private property, and we -- the President has asked
Secretary Chertoff to work with them as we try to secure our border.

Q Senator McCain said that while he is sure Woodstock was a cultural
and pharmaceutical event, no one who supports spending $1 million for a
Woodstock memorial, as Senator Schumer and Clinton have, should be
President. Does President Bush agree or disagree?

MS. PERINO: I think the President would disagree with that earmark.
It's not a good use of taxpayer dollars.

Q Thank you.

Q Will there be a "lessons learned" exercise after the California
wildfires --

MS. PERINO: We always do after-action reports. I don't know if would
be called a "lessons learned" report, but they do after-action reports
to find out what went right and what went wrong. And it looks -- knock
wood -- that everything is going very smoothly in California.

Q Are there lessons to be learned yet?

MS. PERINO: There could be. I think it's too early to say. There
could be good lessons to be learned that we could pass on to other
states. Obviously it's been a model of good coordination from the
federal, state and local governments.

Connie.

Q Are you in a position today to confirm or deny that Syria had a
nuclear facility and that it was bombed by Israel?

MS. PERINO: I'm not going to comment on those press reports.

Q One on Kosovo. They are not -- Russia said yesterday (inaudible)
recognize two separate regions of Georgia as independent states --
namely (inaudible) and (inaudible). (Inaudible) -- split from Serbia by
December 10th. Any comment on that?

MS. PERINO: I'm sorry, I'm not well-versed in it, but we'll try to get
you an answer.

Q Thank you.

END 1:03 P.M. EDT

*The White House does not condone the way the FEMA press conference was
handled.